The commercial showing the biker riding in the rain is quite a bit different than submersion. Apple hasn't shown a commercial of the iPhone being submerged.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
My Jet Black 7+ Bricked - Water Damage
- Thread starter AIen
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Let's say someone happens to get an iPhone 7 with a defective seal where the sim tray is located and that person happens to ride through the rain just like in the commercial. It later starts to act erratically and Apple refuses to replace it because the sensor has turned pink. Fair?
That hasn't happened and that's not what happened to the OP. If that does happen, I've found the Genius Bar to be very helpful.
So anyone can BS that they've only biked it through the rain and Apple will replace it?
OMG wait, an ad that is misleading, shocking, welcome to like all ads ever, by anyway, thought the history of time.
Apple makes no such warranty claim for water damage. They do not advertise the iphone like the iWatch for swimming. Why anyone would get in the pool with it is beyond me.
To be fair, as I recall, that is the type of situation they used as an example during the iPhone 7 keynote when they talked about water resistance.
If you're nice Apple has shown to replace devices out of warranty.
The point is Apple didn't advertise the phone being submerged. The OP submerged it, the advertisement didn't.
If they said you can swim with it then I stand corrected. I dont recall ever seeing that claim from Apple. I sure hope the OP has AC+.
Swimming with or submerging the iPhone? Apple has only mentioned that with the Apple Watch Series 2, not the iPhone 7.
Again, why would they regularly swap out water damaged Apple Watch under the standard warranty but they refuse to do that with the iPhone despite their advertised rating against water ingress to a depth of 1 meter for 30 minutes?
Well in this situation the manufacturer said the car was safe in a crash but instead it blows up.
IP67... Apple said the phone is rated IP67. Per Apple, "tested under controlled laboratory conditions with a rating of IP67 under IEC standard 60529." If it can't be submerged for 30 minutes at 1M depth then it isn't IP67. Plain and simple.
Like I said earlier, Apple can easily resolve this by either removing the IP67 rating or honoring water damaged if its within the IP67 parameters. Otherwise it is false advertising. They're promoting IP67 and selling phones based this rating. They're touting this feature as an advantage over their competitors' phones so of course consumers are going to expect to be able to submerge their phones.
Last edited:
The IP67 rating -- and that is what Apple has in their spec sheet and what counts -- gives you 30 minutes above 1m water. That should cover taking it to a pool.
I always get my phones on day one and have never had a problem.
Not technically. It's rated only for static water. Not everyone wants to limit their time in the pool to 30 minutes and go no deeper than 1 meter (which is pretty shallow and hence impractical).
The AW Series 2, on the other hand, is rated for swimming.
I expect the latter, hence the evasive maneuvers.
The -gate thing is definitely out of hand around here.
TBH the gate thing that I have seen official is when people like you bring it and make threads as to what will be the next gate or gate this.so, in actuality y'all are keeping it alive
I would bet money that if you look at real data, the percentage of defective devices does not change.
Apple sells WAY more iPhones during the first couple of months after release than any other month. They are also in the media during that time and everyone is online talking about them during that time.
We just hear about more defective units right after launch--that doesn't mean that there's a higher percentage of defective phones.
Doesn't the iPhone have a barometer that would be able to read pressure? I wonder if there is anyway they can use that to determine if it was under water deeper than 1m?
So OPs post says he USED the phone in and out of the water to take photos and video. IIRC, IP67 covers the device being accidentally submerged for up to 30 minutes in 1m of water, not being submerged in water while being actively USED and moved about. So if he was actuating the volume button to take photos and videos while submerged, that will make small temporary gaps in the seals where small amounts of water can enter. And, yes, he would have to have use the volume button because capacitive touch screens do not work under water. If the phone was not in silent mode, the shutter sound emitted by the speakers would cause pressure changes that would draw water in that way. This is all allowable within the IP67 spec because it only covers static, accidental submersion, not active use. I'm pretty sure it is in the manual of other IPx7 rated devices I've seen to be sure to thoroughly dry the device before use after it has been submerged, this is why. The Series 1 Apple Watch is IPx7 rated also, and they specifically say, don't submerge and use it purposefully.
TLDR: The iPhone 7/7+ is not an underwater camera. Nowhere has it been advertised as such. It is rated for accidental submersion, not any form of use while submerged. Don't expect to dunk your iPhone in the pool to take photos and expect it to survive your poor choices.
EDIT: Also straight from the User Guide:
iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus are splash, water, and dust resistant and were tested under controlled laboratory conditions with a rating of IP67 under IEC standard 60529. Splash, water, and dust resistance are not permanent conditions and resistance might decrease as a result of normal wear. Liquid damage not covered under warranty. To prevent liquid damage, avoid the following:
TLDR: The iPhone 7/7+ is not an underwater camera. Nowhere has it been advertised as such. It is rated for accidental submersion, not any form of use while submerged. Don't expect to dunk your iPhone in the pool to take photos and expect it to survive your poor choices.
EDIT: Also straight from the User Guide:
iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus are splash, water, and dust resistant and were tested under controlled laboratory conditions with a rating of IP67 under IEC standard 60529. Splash, water, and dust resistance are not permanent conditions and resistance might decrease as a result of normal wear. Liquid damage not covered under warranty. To prevent liquid damage, avoid the following:
- Swimming or bathing with iPhone 7 or iPhone 7 Plus
- Exposing iPhone 7 or iPhone 7 Plus to pressurized water or high velocity water, such as when showering, water skiing, wake boarding, surfing, jet skiing, and so on
- Using iPhone 7 or iPhone 7 Plus in a sauna or steam room
- Intentionally submerging iPhone 7 or iPhone 7 Plus in water
- Operating iPhone 7 or iPhone 7 Plus outside the suggested temperature ranges or in extremely humid conditions
- Dropping iPhone 7 or iPhone 7 Plus or subjecting it to other impacts
- Disassembling iPhone 7 or iPhone 7 Plus, including removing screws
Last edited:
No I was just taking a pic with it submerged waist high. So maybe less than one feet to be exact.
[doublepost=1476597918][/doublepost]
Same reason why I swim with watches that are rated up to a meter of water resistance. Not trying to say I'm right - my intention is to warn people and see what knowledge this forum has to offer. Thanks for everyone's opinion.
Hey, come to think of it, did you depress the volume button in order to take the photo? From what I know, the screen loses touch functionality in water, so maybe the depressed button allowed water ingress?
While there's plenty of documentation that "covers" Apple in terms of warranty liability as @sevoneone pointed out, I still think that Apple should honor the warranty in the scenario that the OP describes.
Apple has always been about the customer experience, and about making devices easy and accessible to use by everyone. If it's going to be advertised that it's water resistant, normal people are going to read that the simplest way, that they can bring it to the swimming pool and in the shower for what they feel is standard everyday use.
For those comparing it to Apple Watch Series 1/2 resistance - I'm not an expert on how water ingress works, but I can see swimming as very different from submersion, because the vigorous movement involved would presumably increase the water pressure significantly and thus make the engineering required to work under those conditions be more precise and enduring.
If Apple is going to split hairs about the fine print, it's essentially the antithesis of what Apple is about - simplifying the user experience. People just want their phones to work, especially with advertised features. Barring intentional attempts to test the limits of how much damage the phone can handle (e.g. Youtube drop / submersion tests, bending it in stores etc.), I think Apple has a responsibility to good customer service to replace the phone.
Otherwise, they should have just done what they did for the iPhone 6S - not advertise that it could resist water only under some very specific circumstances i.e. unreliable water resistance.
[doublepost=1476614073][/doublepost]Did some quick research - https://www.cnet.com/how-to/water-dust-resistance-ratings-in-gadgets-explained/ is quite illuminating - surface swimming requires the equivalent of 50m of depth resistance, but really swimming with your phone is ridiculous anyway.
IPX7 allows for "accidental submersion" - that's definitely not in favor of the OP who engaged in intentional submersion, but I still stand by my point - most normal people won't bother to research it deeply and are likely to engage in similar behavior. It makes for confusing marketing - I can see now why Apple never tried to market a "waterproof" phone before.
Apple has always been about the customer experience, and about making devices easy and accessible to use by everyone. If it's going to be advertised that it's water resistant, normal people are going to read that the simplest way, that they can bring it to the swimming pool and in the shower for what they feel is standard everyday use.
For those comparing it to Apple Watch Series 1/2 resistance - I'm not an expert on how water ingress works, but I can see swimming as very different from submersion, because the vigorous movement involved would presumably increase the water pressure significantly and thus make the engineering required to work under those conditions be more precise and enduring.
If Apple is going to split hairs about the fine print, it's essentially the antithesis of what Apple is about - simplifying the user experience. People just want their phones to work, especially with advertised features. Barring intentional attempts to test the limits of how much damage the phone can handle (e.g. Youtube drop / submersion tests, bending it in stores etc.), I think Apple has a responsibility to good customer service to replace the phone.
Otherwise, they should have just done what they did for the iPhone 6S - not advertise that it could resist water only under some very specific circumstances i.e. unreliable water resistance.
[doublepost=1476614073][/doublepost]Did some quick research - https://www.cnet.com/how-to/water-dust-resistance-ratings-in-gadgets-explained/ is quite illuminating - surface swimming requires the equivalent of 50m of depth resistance, but really swimming with your phone is ridiculous anyway.
IPX7 allows for "accidental submersion" - that's definitely not in favor of the OP who engaged in intentional submersion, but I still stand by my point - most normal people won't bother to research it deeply and are likely to engage in similar behavior. It makes for confusing marketing - I can see now why Apple never tried to market a "waterproof" phone before.
